Last week, an extraordinary case occurred in a certain
city. Three rich ladies from a big corporation rented a room in a
star-class hotel and hired a young man to have a good time. They each
put up 1,000 yuan. In order to deal with the long and arduous
campaign, the young man took 15 Viagra pills. But he overdosed and
died during the process. The rich ladies each paid 50,000 yuan in
compensation.

...

Note: This is just a blog post and not a news report.
The main point was to consider the relevant laws. But a certain
Changde reporter used this as a news lead and came up with the name of the
corporation. It was also claimed that my blog post has hurt the
principals tremendously (even though I never named anyone). Meanwhile
in our city, two vile persons made posts on the government website to heap
abuse me and demand legal sanctions against me, thus damaging my personal
reputation. Accordingly, I reserve the right to seek legal means of
defending my rights against the irresponsible media as well as those who
insult me.)

After the blog post appeared, fake news stories began to
wreck havoc: Last month, several rich local ladies met with their regular
"duck" in a certain hotel in Zhongshan city. According to the service
worker on duty, the unconscious "duck" was carried out of the hotel room six
hours later. He was dead 30 minutes after arriving at the hospital.

Next, fake eyewitnesses appeared: "I swear that this is
true. The public security bureau has investigated the case and imposed
fines." A Mr. Li who works at a certain government agency in Changde
city swore to the reporter: "On the evening of June 15, Changde Tobacco
Factory's three rich ladies rented a room at a star-class hotel and hired a
young man ..." The identities of the three "rich ladies" were
ascertained, being 35, 45 and 48 years old respectively. One of them
is a well-known Changde private entrepreneur.

Meanwhile turmoil ruled within the families of these "rich
ladies."

According to "rich lady" Zeng, she was watching television
at home with her husband on the evening of June 15. "When I heard the
story of ' the three Changde rich ladies and the dead male prostitute,' I
did not pay much attention because I thought it was someone else. When
a friend old me that it was me and two others, I exploded in anger.
But my husband has been very good to me. Would I do something shameful
like that? It was a good thing that my whereabouts on that evening
were known, otherwise I could never clear my name."

The rumor about "the three rich ladies and the dead male
prostitute" drew the attention of the Changde police. According to a
Changde city public security bureau external publicity department worker:
"Even though nobody has filed a police complaint yet, the rumor has been
circulating in Changde. We are paying attention and we are conducting
an investigation." Of course, this never led to anything.

The blogger Zhou Bihua explained to netizens: "I am fairly
well-known in Changde and many people read my blog. I wrote about 'the
city where I live' and my Changde readers misunderstood. I have no
idea who made the leap from here to the three women at the Changde Tobacco
Factory. Even though the matter has been cleared up, I am sorry for
the negative impact on them."

Recently, the story of "Taishan rich ladies cause death of
male prostitute" has been circulating in Taishan city, on and off the
Internet. According to the Taishan City Women's Association, the story
is a rumor. The rumormonger has broken the relevant state laws, and
the police are now investigating the case.

The rumor said that three Taishan rich ladies went to
Kaiping city to rent a male prostitute. During the session, the male
prostitute overdosed and died unexpectedly. The Taishan City Women's
Association stated that as many as 10 different women were 'identified' as
the culprits. The Taishan Women's Association leader contacted the
Kaiping city public security bureau, and was informed that there has been no
such case there. Therefore, this was a rumor.

According to information, the "Taishan rich ladies cause
death of male prostitute" story bears a great resemblance to the blog post
<Reflections on the impossibility applying law in the case of three rich
ladies causing the death of a male prostitute> made by a blogger in Changde
city, Hunan province two years ago. According to the Taishan City
Women's Association worker, a Taishan netizen must have changed the
locations from Changde/Zhongshan to Taishan/Kaiping in the story and morphed
it into the "Taishan rich ladies cause death of male prostitute" rumor.

At 11:00am on January 18, the Guizhou province Anshun city
government held its second press conference on the case of policeman Zhang
Lei shooting two villagers to death. The government was represented by
Pogong town mayor Wu Xin and Guanling county public security bureau deputy
director Ran Taiyou (in charge of criminal investigations). During the
30 minute conference, all sorts of amazing things were said. The
following are notes taken during the Q&A session.

Anshun Government Website: Did Zhang Lei have any prior
conflicts with the people who were involved in the dispute?
Ran Taiyou: This is presently under investigation. The testimony of
the principals do not indicated any conflicts or other relationships between
Zhang Lei and the two sides of the dispute.

Guizhou Daily: Why did the Pogong town government sign a
compensation agreement with the families of the deceased.
Wu Xin: The town government worked hard to maintain social stability.
Since the families of the deceased indicated that they were economically
strapped and requested compensation before they could have the autopsies and
burials, the government studied the request. Both families were found
to be in economic hardship. If the bodies were left in the strees of
Pogong town, it would interfere with traffic and cause inconvenience.
Based upon humanitarian considerations and administrative responsibility,
the town government gave compensation in the form of relief in order to
insure stability. The town government reached an accord with the
families of the deceased who cooperated with the effort. Everything is
moving along smoothly, as the two deceased persons were buried on January 15
in accordance with local customs.
But you may have some questions. The first is that why did the Pogong
town government offer such a high compensation amount given that it is a
poor county? This is because the families of the deceased asked for a
lot, and 350,000 yuan was the minimum that they would accept. They
were not going to cooperate with the autopsies and investigations otherwise.
Secondly, where is the money coming from? The county treasury is
footing the bill temporarily.
Perhaps you may have a third question: Will money be taken out of the civil
affairs budget or treasury to pay the compensation? We are footing the
bill temporarily and we will study what to do afterwards.

Chongqing Morning News: Is Zhang Lei being investigated
for crimes or discipline violations? The official statement on Zhang
Lei was that "he was inexperienced and he acted improperly." What does
that mean? How shall we regard the actions of Zhang Lei?
Ran Taiyou: At the present stage, Zhang Lei is being investigated by the
public security bureau. He is temporarily suspected from duty.
He is under investigation. When the investigation is complete, he will
be dealt with according to the relevant rules and regulations.

Unidentified reporter: Why did Zhang Lei only fire lethal
shots? Is it possible that he shot and injured the man in the leg and
then shot him again in the head to cause death?
Ran Taiyou: Based upon our investigation, we can say categorically that this
view is not objective. Two of the shots were fired into the air.
One shot hit a non-lethal part of the body. There was no such thing as
injuring Guo Yongzhi first and then going up to shoot him in the head.

Xiaoxiang Morning News: Guo Yongzhi was shot twice.
But you just said that there was no such thing as injuring GuoYongzhi first
and then going up to shoot him in the head. Does that mean that he was
shot dead in the head first before being shot in the leg next?
Ran Taiyou: There was no such thing either.

Xiaoxiang Morning News: So he was neither shot in the leg
first nor shot in the head first. Did Zhang Lei shoot Guo Yongzhi
twice faster than the bat of an eye?
Ran Taiyou: You can ask again after we complete our investigation.

(chaos in press conference hall)

Xinmin Weekly: I protest! This press conference has
been rehearsed!

Huasheng News: Two shots. Which was the first shot
and which was the second shot? How close? How close was the gun
from the gunshot wound?
Ran Taiyou: The provincial public security bureau is conducting the scene
analysis and technical examination about the distance. We will tell
you the facts after the investigation has reached its conclusions.

Huasheng News: Guo Yongzhi was shot twice. Which was
the first shot and which was the second shot?
Ran Taiyou: We tell you after the technical examination of the provincial
public security bureau is done.

(the reporter were clearly dissatisfied as chaos broke out
again)

Xinmin Weekly: The police investigation report stuck to
the "attacking a policeman" story on January 13 and the attempt to seize the
gun. How come none of the eyewitnesses interviewed by the media said
so? Many eyewitnesses did not even see any physical contact between
the two sides. At most, the principals said that they shoved and
pushed the police. I don't know how the police concluded that there
was an attack on a policeman and an attempt to seize his gun. Have you
interrogated these eyewitnesses? The police must reveal their
procedures.
Ran Taiyou: As the reporter comrade said, the procedures must be revealed.
However, the case is still under investigation, including the scene analysis
and technical examinations. A lot of investigation is still going on.
When the investigation is completed ...

Huasheng News: If the investigation is still
ongoing, then wasn't it hasty to announce "the attack on a policeman" on
January 13?
Ran Taiyou: No, no, that was not a result. The true legal results will
have to wait until the investigation is completed ...

Chongqing Morning News: A conclusion was drawn before the
investigation was completed. Do you feel that you were acting
responsibly as a government worker?
Ran Taiyou: The state of our investigation ... the final results ... we will
reveal the facts from the investigation to everybody ...

Xinmin Weekly: Do we understand that you mean mean to say
that the "attack on the policeman" and the "attempted seizing of the gun"
are not definitive but just certain testimonies that the police heard during
their investigation?
Ran Taiyou: The final results will have to wait until the investigation is
completed before being revealed to everybody.

Chongqing Morning News: Can you give us a time for the
results of the investigation?
Ran Taiyou: This ... we can ... after this is over, we can set up a time
together ... oh ... this ... exchange ... exchange together.

Xinmin Weekly: Is the press conference today a progress
report on the investigation? Or is it definitive? Please answer
directly!
Ran Taiyou: This is ... the situation of our investigation ... this is not
the final state ...

Host: The Q&A is over.

(Instant chaos in the meeting hall. The reporter are
extremely unhappy and they protested loudly. They shouted out more
questions)

Chongqing Morning News: If you have defined that two
villagers were shot because they attempted to seize the policeman's gun and
the government paid 700,000 yuan in compensation, aren't you encouraging
other people to do the same thing to a certain degree?

Host: A reply has already been given.

Jiangxi TV: Did the compensation to the deceased come from
using the budget for civil affairs?
Wu Xin: It was only borrowed temporarily.

Jiangxi TV: Isn't this loan a form of transfer? The
civil affairs budget is used specifically for relief work.
Wu Xin: No, this comes from civil channels and it is only being temporarily
borrowed.

(The mayor and the deputy director wanted to leave, but
the reporters surrounded them. The scene fell into chaos again.)

Host: We have prepared lunch for everybody. Please
go and eat lunch.
(The reporters said that they didn't want lunch and continued to surround
the mayor and the deputy director, who were able to run off eventually.)

On the evening of January 16, the netizen "huanwsy" made
the post <The most awesome officialese statement of 2009: "Please write a
positive news report, or else I won't talk to you">. Over the past
couple of days, this post has been drawing attention at KDNet, Daqi, etc.

The post said that in January 2010, Zhenjiang City (Jiangsu
province) TV interviewed a housing department official who told them:
"Please write a positive news report, or else I won't talk to you!"
The post also included a link to the video of the TV news report. The
video was about a local real estate development project which had buyers
even though it never went through the legal procedures. The reporter
was trying to figure out what kind of supervision was exercised by the
housing department, and got this answer from the official.

"It has to be mainly positive propaganda ..."

"In terms of your concepts about this type of propaganda reporting ..."

"... I can refuse to receive you."

[020] Why The Hong Kong Legislative Council Is
Relatively Lame (01/19/2010) ... compared to the rugby scrimmage
in Taiwan.

[Note: This live broadcast was accompanied by the warning
message: Bad model behavior -- do not emulate!]

<Oriental Sunday> is one of the top selling tabloid magazines
in Hong Kong. In the current issue, their paparazzis have managed to
capture "post-80's" goddess Christina Chan Hau-man "demonstrating her buns."

Very quickly came a
Facebook page titled: "Going too far! We must protest!
<Oriental Sunday> took stealth photos of Christina Chan! (How shall we
respond!?)"

Yes, how shall we respond? How about boycotting
<Oriental Sunday>? Unfortunately, supporters of Christina Chan are not
<Oriental Sunday> readers before and therefore their boycott will have zero
impact on the magazine circulation. If anything, this is free publicity
which <Oriental Sunday> will appreciate very much.

P.S. (Apple
Daily) The Television and Entertaining Licensing Authority
announced on January 22 that it has received 119 complaints against <Oriental
Sunday> by January 21, 2010. The magazine has been referred to the
Obscene Articles Tribunal for classification. If found guilty of a
publishing an indecent or obscene article, <Oriental Sunday> will be fined
something like HKD 20,000 or so according to precedents. This is peanuts
compared to the revenue from the extra number of copies that they sell through
this free promotion in <Apple Daily>.

[018] Hong Kong By The
Numbers (01/18/2010) (Hong
Kong University Public Opinion Programme) (1,008 persons
interviewed January 11-13, 2010 by telephone) (Note: I am one of the
1,008 persons who were randomly chosen for this survey, this being the second
time being interviewed by HKU POP in eight years of residence in Hong Kong)

Q1. After the government proposed the constitutional
reform, some people think that Legislative Councilors should conduct a
five-district resignation/by-election to express public opinion with respect
to constitutional reform. Do you support or oppose the action? 9%: Very much support
16%: Somewhat support
12%: Half-half
24%: Somewhat oppose
26%: Very much oppose
14%: Don't know/no opinion

Q2. The Civic Party and the League of Social Democrats
intend to hold a referendum for "achieving universal suffrage as quickly as
possible" and "eliminating the functional constituencies." They will
send five candidates in the five districts, and the referendum will be
considered a success if the sum total of votes for these five candidates is
greater than the sum total of the five strongest opponents. Do you
support of oppose this proposal? 8%: Very much support
23%: Somewhat support
12%: Half-half
20%: Somewhat oppose
21%: Very much oppose
16%: Don't know/no opinion

Recently a series of photos were popular at the Hong Kong
Internet forums. A scantily clad woman was doing pole dancing and
other gymnastic feats in a Hong Kong MTR car. This woman is not
identified. According to the Hong Kong police, it is illegal to take
photos inside the subway system without the permission of the MTR. An
investigation is underway.

Tengxian TV is supposed to serve as a window for a culture
and a bridge for communication between the people and the government in
Tengxian county. This is supposed to promote communication and
exchange. But for some reason as of some moment in time, Tengxian TV
began to fall into the trap of airing many fake and vulgar commercials.
It is deeply poisoned if it is not rescued soon.

In the evening, Tengxian TV runs aphrodisiac commercials
during the evening while discussing male and female ailments during the day.
Video segments discussing conjugal relationships and exaggerating the
efficacy of medicine can be seen at all hours. Not only is the
reputation of Tengxian TV ruined among the people of Tengxian (and they may
not have any to begin with), the minds of the people of Tengxian are also
seriously polluted.

I am a Tengxian resident. Each evening, I am lucky
enough to watch the "exciting" programs and the "exaggerated" acting on
Tengxian TV. Who is backing this TV station? How can they be
showing such awesome commercials? What are the unspeakable secrets
behind these commercials? Is the TV station is such desperate straits?
Are they economically viable only if they air these vulgar commercials?
Are the sexual performances of Chinese men so poor that they need medicine
to enhance themselves? After watching so much of this, I want to puke
but I also begin to think that "our government officials in Tengxian must no
longer be manly, whereas the rich women must all be sex-starved." This
is pathetically funny.

As a county mouthpiece, Tengxian TV should consider the
social impact of their broadcasts even if they are in financial trouble.
They should be able to see which commercials can be shown and which ones
cannot be. Our leaders must be N times more aware of this than we do.
I don't know if the leaders have thought about how to build a strong media.
Have they led and guided public opinion? How much did they care about
people's livelihood issues? Please do not spend all on time on
thinking what kinds of commercials will reap big revenues.

The audacity of Tengxian TV did not come overnight.
The relevant departments were lax in their supervision for a long time
before things come to this stage.

Average length of erection:
Europe/USA: 18 to 22 cm
China: 9 to 14 cm

He is dissatisfied with his size and he wants to become longer and bigger

A female cop in Taipei
County attempted to kill herself with a gunshot and was still in emergency
room as of last night, local media reported.

The police officer, Tsai Shih-wen (蔡世雯), 27, carried her
gun back to her dorm room when she was on duty during the shift from 10 a.m.
to 12 p.m, said United Evening News. She shot her right face while sitting
on the edge of her bed, and the bullet passed through her left face, said
the report.

The gunshot shocked one of her roommates, another female
cop who was asleep before the incident occurred. Tsai was rushed to Mackay
Memorial Hospital's Danshui branch, and was still in emergency room as of
yesterday.

Click on the Apple Daily News-In-Motion and the first
thing that appears is the photo of the female police officer. This
photo was placed on the front page of the newspaper. But there is a
big problem here.

The front page was supposed to be about the female police
officer Tsai Shih-wen who attempted suicide. But this turned
out to be scandalous as the photo on the front page is not Tsai Shih-wen.
Rather it is Tsai Pei-hua, a classmate of Tsai Shih-wen and a practicing
lawyer in Kaohsiung. Both women studied law at Kaohsiung. Both
woman wear glasses and they look alike. When the Apple Daily photographer
filmed the classmate album, the wrong photo was used. Apple Daily has
issued a
correction/apology and the front page has been removed from its
website. Tsai Pei-hua has been in hiding from reporters for
the past two days.

[012] The Truth About
The Google Affair (01/15/2010) (Douban)
This is a translation of an anonymous blog/forum post by an omniscient person
who is somehow privy to confidential information from all sides.

If you have any doubts about the following truth or if you
think that there are other versions out there, then you need to explain the
following fact:

When Google headquarters announced their withdrawal from
China, they immediately canceled the rights of all Chinese engineers to
access the servers on which their program codes reside. The engineers
only found out when they showed up for work that they could not longer enter
the home page of their server. There was no pre-notification.
Many people were halfway through their coding when they were frozen out.
They will have to wait for weeks when they are transferred to the United
States before they can continue to write.

If Google had planned to leave beforehand, why would they
do this? They could have continued to let the workers work and clean
up. For example, the Chinese company does Google Music differently
than the US (music.google.cn and music.google.com). If Chinese Google
Music is canceled, the Chinese engineers can do the code migration.

But all Chinese engineers were placed on paid leave while
that work is being taken over by foreigners.

Why did Google suddenly distrust its Chinese team?
After all, they developed their own codes and they should be more efficient
in making the migration.

The only reason is that the Chinese Communist Party must
have inserted special agents inside Google (specifically in the Shanghai
office of Google).

The truth of the matter is that this person was sent by
the Chinese Communist Party. After being hired by Google, this person
copied down the critical program code and handed it over the the Chinese
Communist Party.

The purpose of this action was to gain access to the email
of the "human rights organizations." Google's official statement noted
this.

The flaws of the Gmail system became exposed. Google
could not officially acknowledge this, or else their reputation would suffer
internationally. All Google could do was to stop all work in China.
All engineers in China were not allowed to access the program code server.
Then they seized the opportunity to correct their Gmail code over the next
few days.

So the whole truth is simply this emergency incident.
You can read the original Google statement. It was written in haste,
but you can sense the shock among their top leaders. The three top
managers of Google held an emergency meeting and came to a unanimous
decision. How could they have reached an agreement with the United
States government to do this beforehand? Do you feel that an official
Google announcement would be so crudely written unlike any official
document?

Google's withdrawal was not because of the Internet
censorship. While that was something that Google felt uncomfortable
about, they had put up with it over the past few years.

But the code theft this time caused Google to face a total
collapse crisis. (The official Google blog said that this involved an
intellectual property theft problem). To put it bluntly, the survival
of the entire company would be threatened if they stayed in China.
Therefore, they put a stop to all work at their China company.

While Google planned to negotiate with the Chinese
government at first, they have given up the effort today. Even if the
government makes concessions, Google does not plan to stay. If they
stay, they risk their lives. This is not a question of making money in
the China market or not. The risk is too high to make a little money
but losing the entire company.

As for limiting the access rights of the Chinese engineers
to the program code, it should that said that Google trusts its technical
staff. Even an intern can access more than 99% of the program code.
Google has only one program code database. Each person who enters
learns the first law of development: Search! Search for similar code
in the program code database and then email the original author. By
sharing the program code across the entire company, they were able to
achieve tremendous coding efficiency. The Google program code,
comments and technical description are open to every engineer.

You can criticize me, or you can offer other explanations.
But please read my whole essay and then see if you can justify your own
version!!

I can only say that the Chinese Communist Party has gone
too far and made it impossible for Google to go on.

P.S. This case is still under investigation. There
is a person who is a Chinese Communist Party member. After arriving in
Google, he downloaded the core program code of Gmail. This person has
vanished now. But we know the above. As to who sent him, we can
only guess. Over the past couple of days, Google headquarters people
have interviewed every engineer in China to see if this person has
collaborators. At the same time, Google headquarters is accessing how
much program code has been leaked and how much of it has to be re-written.
When this is done, they will begin to transfer the Chinese engineers (if
they didn't investigate and transfer them immediately, they would be
bringing the moles to the United States). At that time, Google
headquarters will state the truth. You can wait a month and come back
to re-read this post.

P.P.S. Forget it, let me explain this. There
were three moles, one of whom was the Chinese Communist Party branch
secretary. This party secretary was set up four years ago by the
National Security Ministry. This guy studied at Jiaotong University
and then jointed Computer Security Department. The department sent him
to study computers at the Computer Security School in Jiaotong University.
He programmed every day. When he graduated, he joined Google.
There, he recruited two more insiders. One of them was the insider who
broke into the source code for Gmail and gave it to the Chinese government.
The government wanted this mainly to monitor the anti-Communist persons who
use Gmail.
So this was sensationalistic, because of the involvement of the Chinese
Communist Party branch.
This guy got a 1,000,000 yuan reward, plus public servant status.
These people used to sneak over to Lujiazui after work to attend Chinese
Communist Party branch meetings.

P.P.P.S.
How did Google that their code was obtained by the agents?
Unless Google installs surveillance software on the computers of all the
workers.
To access the program code, one must log into the only program code server
at Google. The server will keep a record of your visits.
It is only known now that this person is a Chinese Communist Party member
and he reviewed a lot of program code within a short time. This person
has now vanished. Based upon this, I conjecture that he turned the
code over to his organization.
Firstly, he clearly attacked many servers that carried source code.
Secondly, he clearly obtained it illegally.
Let us continue to watch this. My mobile phone will be ringing ...
Right now, most of the colleagues are prepared to leave. A small
number of technical people and the legal department will stay.
Everybody is depressed. Nobody thought that this was how this would
end.

[ESWN Comment: Due to the many links that are coming
into this story, I deem it necessary to comment. Firstly and most
importantly, I do not think that this is true based upon the internal
contents of the story. I referred to the author as 'omniscient'
because this person appears to have the knowledge of a Google worker (such
as network access privileges) but is also privy to information within the Chinese
Communist Party (such as the mole receiving 1,000,000 yuan in reward money).
In practice, this is extremely unlikely.

More importantly, this story misses the details about the
hacking breach that David Drummond referred to. This story is just
about a mole downloading code from inside the company. There is
nothing about hacking. There is also nothing to jump from Google to
the 32 companies that were attacked by the hacker(s) based solely upon the
above story. The
following story is completely orthogonal to the above story.

Hackers seeking source code from Google, Adobe and dozens
of other high-profile companies used unprecedented tactics that combined
encryption, stealth programming and an unknown hole in Internet Explorer,
according to new details released by the anti-virus firm McAfee.

“We have never ever, outside of the defense industry, seen
commercial industrial companies come under that level of sophisticated
attack,” says Dmitri Alperovitch, vice president of threat research for
McAfee. “It’s totally changing the threat model.” Google announced Tuesday
that it had been the target of a “highly sophisticated” and coordinated hack
attack against its corporate network. It said the hackers had stolen
intellectual property and sought access to the Gmail accounts of human
rights activists. The attack originated from China, the company said.

The attackers used nearly a dozen pieces of malware and
several levels of encryption to burrow deeply into the bowels of company
networks and obscure their activity, according to Alperovitch.

“The encryption was highly successful in obfuscating the
attack and avoiding common detection methods,” he said. “We haven’t seen
encryption at this level. It was highly sophisticated.” The hack attacks,
which are said to have targeted at least 34 companies in the technology,
financial and defense sectors, have been dubbed “Operation Aurora” by McAfee
due to the belief that this is the name the hackers used for their mission.

The name comes from references in the malware to the name
of a file folder named “Aurora” that was on the computer of one of the
attackers. McAfee researchers say when the hacker compiled the source code
for the malware into an executable file, the compiler injected the name of
the directory on the attacker’s machine where he worked on the source code.

Minutes after Google announced its intrusion, Adobe
acknowledged in a blog post that it discovered Jan. 2 that it had also been
the target of a “sophisticated, coordinated attack against corporate network
systems managed by Adobe and other companies.” Neither Google nor Adobe
provided details about how the hacks occurred.

In the wake of Threat Level’s Thursday story disclosing
that a zero-day vulnerability in Internet Explorer was exploited by the
hackers to gain access to Google and other companies, Microsoft published an
advisory about the flaw that it already had in the works.

McAfee has added protection to its products to detect the
malware used in the attacks.

Although the initial attack occurred when company
employees visited a malicious website, Alperovitch said researchers are
still trying to determine if this occurred through a URL sent to employees
by e-mail or instant messaging or through some other method, such as
Facebook or other social networking sites.

Once the user visited the malicious site, their Internet
Explorer browser was exploited to download an array of malware to their
computer automatically and transparently. The programs unloaded seamlessly
and silently onto the system, like Russian nesting dolls, flowing one after
the other.

“The initial piece of code was shell code encrypted three
times and that activated the exploit,” Alperovitch said. “Then it executed
downloads from an external machine that dropped the first piece of binary on
the host. That download was also encrypted. The encrypted binary packed
itself into a couple of executables that were also encrypted.” One of the
malicious programs opened a remote backdoor to the computer, establishing an
encrypted covert channel that masqueraded as an SSL connection to avoid
detection. This allowed the attackers ongoing access to the computer and to
use it as a “beachhead” into other parts of the network, Alperovitch said,
to search for login credentials, intellectual property and whatever else
they were seeking.

McAfee obtained copies of malware used in the attack, and
quietly added protection to its products a number of days ago, Alperovitch
said, after its researchers were first brought in by hacked companies to
help investigate the breaches.

Although security firm iDefense told Threat Level on
Tuesday that the Trojan used in some of the attacks was the Trojan.Hydraq,
Alperovitch says the malware he examined was not previously known by any
anti-virus vendors.

iDefense also said that a vulnerability in Adobe’s Reader
and Acrobat applications was used to gain access to some of the 34 breached
companies. The hackers sent e-mail to targets that carried malicious PDF
attachments.

Alperovitch said that none of the companies he examined
were breached with a malicious PDF, but he said there were likely many
methods used to attack the various companies, not just the IE vulnerability.

Once the hackers were in systems, they siphoned off data
to command-and-control servers in Illinois, Texas and Taiwan. Alperovitch
wouldn’t identify the systems in the United States that were involved in the
attack, though reports indicate that Rackspace, a hosting firm in Texas, was
used by the hackers. Rackspace disclosed on its blog this week that it
inadvertently played “a very small part” in the hack.

The company wrote that “a server at Rackspace was
compromised, disabled, and we actively assisted in the investigation of the
cyber attack, fully cooperating with all affected parties.” Alperovitch
wouldn’t say what the attackers might have found once they were on company
networks, other than to indicate that the high-value targets that were hit
“were places of important intellectual property.” iDefense, however, told
Threat Level that the attackers were targeting source-code repositories of
many of the companies and succeeded in reaching their target in many cases.

Alperovitch says the attacks appeared to have begun Dec.
15, but may have started earlier. They appear to have ceased on Jan. 4, when
command-and-control servers that were being used to communicate with the
malware and siphon data shut down.

“We don’t know if the attackers shut them down, or if some
other organizations were able to shut them down,” he said. “But the attacks
stopped from that point.” Google announced Tuesday that it had discovered in
mid-December that it had been breached. Adobe disclosed that it discovered
its breach on Jan. 2.

Aperovitch says the attack was well-timed to occur during
the holiday season when company operation centers and response teams would
be thinly staffed.

The sophistication of the attack was remarkable and was
something that researchers have seen before in attacks on the defense
industry, but never in the commercial sector. Generally, Alperovitch said,
in attacks on commercial entities, the focus is on obtaining financial data,
and the attackers typically use common methods for breaching the network,
such as SQL-injection attacks through a company’s web site or through
unsecured wireless networks.

“Cyber criminals are good … but they cut corners. They
don’t spend a lot of time tweaking things and making sure that every aspect
of the attack is obfuscated,” he said.

Alperovitch said that McAfee has more information about
the hacks that it’s not prepared to disclose at present but hopes to be able
to discuss them in the future. Their primary goal, he said, was to get as
much information public now to allow people to protect themselves.

He said the company has been working with law enforcement
and has been talking with “all levels of the government” about the issue,
particularly in the executive branch. He couldn’t say whether there were
plans by Congress to hold hearings on the matter.

The reason I translated the story above was not because it
was truthful. Rather, the story had wide circulation in China because it was just
the kind of thing that Twitter users like to tweet and re-tweet without having
to think about the veracity of the contents. It was translated here for English-only
readers to read and think about, or to stay abreast of what the Chinese people
might know or think.]

[011] A Comparison of News Reports (01/15/2010)
To whom does the future belong?

A 26-year-old taxi passenger – a university student from
Denmark – was arrested for assaulting the cab driver, trying to steal his
bag, breaking the vehicle's windscreen and for possessing a controlled drug
in Yau Ma Tei early yesterday. The Dane, who is studying at a Hong Kong
university, appeared to have been drunk when he was arrested, police
officers said.

Q1. Do you think that the discussion on the Express
Rail Link in Hong Kong has been adequate or inadequate so far?38%: Adequate
5%: Half-half
50%: Inadequate
7%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. The government is seeking Legislative Council funding
for HK$ 66.9 billion, which is equivalent to HK$10,000 per Hong Kong citizen,
for the Express Rail Link construction project. Do you think the price
is reasonable, too low or to high?26%: Reasonable
1%: Too low
59%: Too high
14%: Don't know/hard to say

Two young men were arrested
yesterday in connection with the Causeway Bay acid attack last month - the
first arrests following a spate of such attacks across Hong Kong since
December 2008. The men, aged 23 and 18, were arrested in Yuen Long, and
police said they were friends. Officers took the 23-year-old to his home in
Yiu Fu House on the Yiu Tung Estate in Shau Kei Wan for further
investigation last night. Officers removed items from the flat including
clothing. The younger man was freed on police bail.

The above article does not
address the question "How did the Hong Kong police track down the acid
attackers?" For the answer(s), you would have to read the
Chinese-language newspapers.

23-year-old male named Lu was believed to be responsible
for throwing the acid bomb into the streets. He is said to be an
unemployed male living in Shau Kei Wan. His boyfriend is the
18-year-old male named Law with nickname "Fatso," a student in a design
school and a residnet of Yuen Long district.

According to information, the Criminal Investigative
Division officers picked up more than 70 surveillance videos from the
neighborhood. Upon viewing the videos, the officers spotted a
strangely dressed male holding a Staccato shoe store shopping bag before the
attack but empty-handed after the attack. The police had also found a
similar Staccato shopping bag on the stairwell next to a bottle of drain
cleaner. Thus, they determined that this male was a likely suspect.

The police spent another five days viewing the tapes to
look for the presence of this male. They spotted the male entering the
MTR station and using an Octopus card to pay for the fare. They
tracked the card usage and noted that the male had exited at the Shau Kei
Wan MTR station.

The police also inputted photos of the male from the
videos into their computer system and compared them against the database of
Hong Kong ID's. Once they found likely matches, they also compared
fingerprints found at the scene to the database entries. They were
able to identify the male.

In addition, police officers also determined from the
videos that the suspect had purchased two bottles of Flying Fish drain
cleaner on the day before the attack.

The Criminal Intelligence Team then followed the suspect
for two weeks. They found that the suspect visited his boyfriend in
Yuen Long once every few days. Last Saturday, there was another acid
attack in Temple Street, Yau Ma Tei district. However the suspect was
nowhere near Temple Street. Failing to catch the suspect in the act,
the police finally decided to make the arrest.

(This Apple Daily Action News report goes even further to suggest that the
police followed the suspect and picked up his DNA traces after he dined at a restaurant to
match against dandruff found in the black shopping bag at the crime scene.)

Officers investigating the Causeway Bay acid attack last
year found it on a staircase in a building near Sogo department store.
Inside was a bottle of corrosive fluid.

It was their only lead. Yet a month later, after
painstaking detective work around the clock, officers had traced the
suspect, trailed him around the city, and finally made their arrest.

The attacker was carrying the bag when he walked into the
six-storey building in Lockhart Road on December 12. It originally contained
two bottles of acid. One of them was thrown from a staircase between the
second and third floors into the crowded street below, causing panic, and
burning six passers-by.

About 30 detectives from Hong Kong Island regional crime
unit pored over the tapes looking for one vital clue. Then they got their
breakthrough. Footage showed a man leaving Causeway Bay station on the day
of the attack carrying a black paper bag.

The investigation team moved swiftly. Officers collected
the Octopus card data of commuters who passed through that turnstile,
matching times with footage, to identify the suspect. The Octopus card
management company provided transaction records of the card, allowing police
to study the suspect's movements.

The net was tightening. Officers lay in wait at a number
of the locations regularly visited by the card holder. After spotting him,
officers tailed him day and night. They were certain of one thing: The man did not carry out
the latest attack in Yau Ma Tei last week because he was under police
surveillance at the time.

Investigators also knew the suspect bought the bottles in
a shop in Shau Kei Wan on the day of the attack, an officer said. "The acid
was sold hours before the attack."

After following the suspect for about a week and securing
evidence, police moved in and arrested him in Yuen Long on Wednesday. That
night they took the clothes he is believed to have worn on December 12 from
his flat in Shau Kei Wan.

The officer said sweat on the paper bag could be used as
evidence to prove the suspect had used the bag.

On Thursday, Senior Superintendent Yu Tat-chung, head of
Hong Kong Island regional crime unit, said that they had grounds to believe
the suspect was responsible for the crime.

The case - the first attack on Hong Kong Island - had
similarities to four other attacks, in Mong Kok and Yau Ma Tei, in which
corrosive liquid was thrown on to busy pedestrianised areas from old
buildings with lax security.

But there was a difference, the officer said. "Unlike the
other four cases, the two bottles of acid involved in the Causeway Bay cases
were wrapped with paper."

[008] Google Leaving?
Is this because they couldn't adapt, or because they are bitter?
(01/14/2010) (QQ
Finance)

Google is really upset this time! Yesterday at 3pm,
the official Google blog published a post titled "A new approach to China."
The content included "... this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn,
and potentially our offices in China." The sense of anger and
frustration was clear in the words.

It would be the first time in Google's history that they
walked out. The upset Google chose to tell the world about a total
withdrawal from the China market in a public manner. Many people don't
understand, even thinking that this was just a show But more stunning
events would ensue.

On the morning of January 13, the day after Google made
its statement, the Google search engine began to provide full visiting
rights. All the banned keywords and contents were available for
searching. This was clearly coordinated with their statement before
departure, in order to say, "Google is really leaving. The
consequences of upsetting Google are extremely serious!"

Speaking of Google in China, we must review the
unfortunate history of the global portal Google in China!

As early as September 2000, Google began to provide
Chinese-language search services to the Chinese-language world. But
whether because they were concerned more about the competition from the
American portals such as Yahoo! at the time, or because they did not
perceive the potential of the Chinese Internet users and the China market,
Google's senior manager did not pay sufficient attention to China.

In contrast, the main competitor of Google (Baidu) began
to to provide Chinese-language search services more than one year later than
Google. But because Baidu concentrated on the China market and
Chinese-language search engine, it was able to quickly leapfrog over Google
to become the number one brand in the Chinese-language search engine market.

In March 2004, the Internet research company iResearch
found that after four years, Baidu had 48.5% of the search engine market
while number two Google only had a 19.8% share.

"Most of the activities of Google's Chinese-language
services were 'in response' to what others did." iResearch CEO Yang
Weiqing once said.

Google's passiveness is more its own doing than
market-driven. As the kingpin of the global search engine market,
English-language Google paid scant attention to the Chinese-language China
market until Baidu began its unstoppable rise. To engage in battle
only after finding out that the cake has already been divided meant that
Google was doomed to tragedy in China.

The failed romance between Google and China had another
key ingredient: culture. "Baidu understands the Chinese language
better." To swap a word, "Baidu understands China better." This
is the reason why Google lost. In a country such as China with its
special characteristics, Google was destined to fail.

The special characteristics of China have stumped many
multinational companies, and Google was no exception. Of course, we
also have many successful examples, such as Volkswagen. But the
problem was that Google couldn't do it, because of its own special
characteristics. First of all, Google is an Internet company.
Regardless of their assertion that they are not a media company, they have
the characteristics of media. This explained why Google fumbled in
China. Which foreign media company has ever succeeded in China?
At least I have not found any examples.

Next, Google has its own corporate concepts, such as
"Don't do evil." It does not matter whether we agree with this
concept, or whether our understanding of this concept might be the same as
theirs, Google has firmly insisted on this position. In China, this
"Don't do evil" concept will inevitably lead to clashes with the supervisory
departments. In other words, I believe that the Google managers were
tormented by their concepts of corporate ethics until it became intolerable
now.

Also, Google faced a number of seemingly inexplicable
accusations in China. For us, these accusations may seem right, but
Google didn't think so. But Google persisted for the sake of the
market or possibly other reasons. Over the years, this trend (which
may be called "oppression") did not lessen but actually increased.
Meanwhile, things that Google regarded as wrong continued to exist safely.
For example, Google spent a great deal of effort on Google Music, but the
clearly illegal Baidu mp3 downloads continue unabated. As another
example, Google Books encountered strong official resistance. If we
were Google ourselves, we would find these things incomprehensible as well.

At a time when a market carries huge policy and business
risks, Google chooses to quit. This is a reasonable thing to do.

[007] 70% Chinese
Internet Users Surveyed Don't Think The Government Should Make Any Concessions
To Google (01/14/2010) (Huanqiu)

The news that Google has threatened to withdraw from the
China market has become a hot discussion topic among Chinese Internet users.
Some people felt sorry that Google may leave; some people are concerned that
the China market will no longer be competitive; others welcomed the
departure of Google. The online survey conducted at the Huanqiu
website showed that more than half of the respondents did not think that the
departure of Google will affect their Internet usage. About 70% of the
respondents said that the Chinese government should not accept the
conditions offered by Google.

According to reports, there were two main reasons offered
by Google for why they want to depart: First, they detected sophisticated
technological attacks against their system infrastructure coming from China.
Secondly, they are unwilling to continue to censorship of search results by
Google.cn. Google stated its conditions by saying that they will
discuss with the Chinese government over the next few weeks about how to
have a search engine without censorship under the existing legal framework
in China.

Since the search engine services provided by Google has
direct relations with many Internet users, their potential withdraw drew the
attention of Internet users. On the day of the announcement, Huanqiu
ran an online survey with enthusiastic participation. As for 18:30pm,
more than 10,000 netizens have voted. With respect to "Does the
withdrawal of Google from China have any impact on your Internet usage?"
9767 persons (55.6%) said no, while the other 7801 persons (44.4%) said yes.
With respect to "Which search engine do you use most frequently on the
Internet?" 12901 persons (73.2%) chose Baidu, 4153 (23.6%) chose Google
while less than 5% chose one of the five other search engines (such as
Tencent's SoSo, etc). This may be the reason why more than half of the
Internet users say that they won't be affected by the departure of Google.
With respect to the survey question "Do you think that the Chinese
government should accept the conditions of Google?" 1449 persons (70.4%)
said no while 610 persons (29.6%) said yes.

With respect to the Google statement, Internet users had
different reactions. Some people were sorry that Google might leave,
because Google has formidable technologies while carrying fewer
advertisements. Its departure will cause inconvenience for some
Internet users. The China market will also become less competitive,
which would not be good for the development of the Chinese search engine
industry. But many people also welcomed the departure of Google.
These netizens said that Google is not a purely commercial company, because
they have many ties and connections to the American government. Some
people said, "They describe themselves as a company all the time, but they
are serving as the advance party for the American government in the
political gambit." "The withdrawal of Google from China is more like
something that the American government is doing. Recently, so many
things are happening between the Chinese and American government ... Iran,
North Korea, selling arms to Taiwan, trade ... more importantly, even as
Google issued the blog post, American Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is
summoning the senior managers of the Internet companies and bringing out new
laws and regulations." Other netizens said that Google is not just a
search engine company in the United States, because they also provide data
services to the American government (and the military in particular).
Many of the Internet security experts and technicians at the National
Security Agency come from Google and other big Internet companies, and the
Google servers are now all located on American soil. This netizen
said: "This means that all the search records of Chinese netizens can be
monitored by Google as well as the government departments that are tied in
with Google."

Google announced that it will withdraw from China.
This does not show that Google is a "human rights warrior" as promoted by
their fans. It proved precisely that Google is a profiteer.

The tone of the top Google legal advisor disgusts me.
He could have said that they are withdrawing for economic reasons, plain and
simple. Instead, they have to make themselves look good by saying that
Google was attacked by Chinese people, that Gmail accounts of Chinese
dissidents were attacked, and so on in order to explain why they are
withdrawing from China. This type of tone is an insult to the
intelligence of the ordinary Chinese citizens. But it may just appeal
to certain supercilious westerners who have never been to China, know
nothing whatsoever about China but like to criticize China all the same.

I will simply offer one hypothesis. If Google holds
a 80% share of the search engine market in China, will the Google senior
managers announce that they will withdraw from China because they "do no
evil" in a high profile manner like this?

The only feeling that I get out of the whole affair is
disgust.

The above comments are written by a former loyal Google
user, and it has nothing to do with Baidu. The so-called Google fans
who know a bit about Google technology and think that Google is an ethical
model shouldn't bother to comment. You don't know what search engines
are about and you don't know what freedom and human rights are.

By the way, comments are closed here. If you want to
whine, go to Twitter. You are not welcomed to my turf.

Early this morning, Google announced on its official blog
that it is considering shutting down its Google business in China and
website Google.cn.

With respect to Google's announcement, I basically think
that it is a form of psychological warfare. It is unlikely that they
will go through with this. If they go through with it, it will be
their loss. Most Chinese Internet users will forget the entire affair
within three months. A few Internet users may occasionally reminisce
about it, but that would be just a few ripples in a pond.

The Google announcement is largely related to the clash of
concepts and management philosophy. For the longest time, Google did
not think that they are media. Instead, they think of themselves only
as a search engine whose results are derived by technology and for which
they bore no administrative responsibility. Thus, even if there are
personal attacks against leaders in the United States, Google will only
offer an explanation and nothing else.

When Google came to the China, they had no intent to adapt
to the situation in the market there. They simply continued the same
concepts. Therefore, when the media exposed them for purveying
pornography and illegal content, Google could only respond hurriedly,
including changing leaders. Even so, Google is still facing the
pressure to take on more administrative responsibility.

Google also failed to understand the recent issue of
writers' copyrights. In their view, they think that they are not
scanning entire books for readers to read. Instead, they only scan
parts of a book which act like quotations that help readers to enquire and
understand the book. To a certain extent, this should help the writers
in getting greater exposure and understanding. They could not
understand why it drew so much blowback in mainland China.

For the Chinese people, we are more sophisticated in our
thinking and we can appreciate what different segments of people think.
But this is hard for Americans to deal with.

Will Google really withdraw from the China market? I
personally think that this is merely psychological warfare. For the
global Internet industry, a huge part of the market would be missing without
China. The future development of the Internet is towards 3G with many
services. It will be a huge blow to Google's global strategy if it did
not have the China market. In the long term, it will have problems
with its mobile phones, mobile operating systems and related services.

More importantly, will the Chinese government departments
come under pressure if Google withdraws from the China market? Not a
single government department will be held responsible or come under pressure
if Google withdraws. The majority of Internet users will not
experience any material impact. The only people who will feel the pain
are the Google workers in China. The result will be that the Chinese
companies will become stronger in China, in search engines and in the future
3G-based industry. If one day Google should think about re-entering
China, they will find that they have become totally uncompetitive. It
is also uncertain whether their action here may affect any future
collaboration with Chinese companies on Google Android.

I think that China and the United States are strategic
competitors, but also cooperative partners in many areas as well. It
is the same with Google. They must realize that China and the United
States are different, and they must find more channels for exchange and
communication. They must also be forward-looking. Withdrawal is
not a good choice for Google.

According to foreign media reports, at 15:00 on January 12
USA local time, Google senior vice president and Chief Legal Officer David
Drummond made a post at the official Google blog to say that Google is
considering shutting down the Google.cn website and its China office.

The sensationalism caused by this piece of news was no
less than that for the story of the hacking of Baidu. Various people
spoke up, mostly in regret or wishing that Google would stay as if Google
had really left already. I disagree. I don't believe for a
moment that Google will withdraw. Even if it did withdraw, it will
only be temporarily so. Even if it is really withdrawing, it may
decide to return some day. Therefore, this so-called withdrawal is
just Google's hissy fit.

Compared to the local Baidu, Google is not faring as well
in its business. "During the third quarter of 2009, Baidu has a 63.8%
share of the China market compared to Google's 32.8%. At the end of
2008, the two companies began their first change of fortune after a long
period of stability when Baidu and Google got 63.5% and 27.3% market share
respectively." Although Google is not hugely successful, it is not
failing or undistinguished. We must also note that the number of
Internet users has been continuously growing along with the market.
Therefore, Google's business volume must be increasing as well.

If Google really withdraws, they will lose the China
market. Can they bear it? I don't think that a big
multi-national company can really abandon the largest market with infinite
growth potential. Will Coca Cola leave China? No. Will
Pepsi Cola leave China? No. Will Microsoft give up the China
market? No. Would Google be the only one to give up? I
don't think so.

Google is not a child who can do anything that he wants;
Google is not any individual's Google; Google is the capitalists'
Google. Capital will do everything possible to maximize profit, even
things that it does not like. This is the power of capital and the
power of profits. You san see how the capitalists reacted after Google
hinted that it might withdraw from China: "As a a result of the news,
Google's share price dropped 1.3% in after hours trading to USD 583.05 from
the Tuesday closing price of USD 590.48." If the capitalists
disapprove of Google's withdrawal, it may not have a choice.

From last year on, Google has been treading the red line
of Chinese law. Therefore, Google has not been having an easy time.
Should they withdraw from the China market as a result? That would be
too naive. If they try to adapt to the China market, they could have a
decent time. Will Google really act "impulsively"? Unlikely.
It is easy to withdraw, but it will be hard to re-enter.

Google is not a simple-minded boor or else they could not
be successful to date. Microsoft never complained in spite of being
sued all over Europe. Could Google be even more impatient than
Microsoft? Ho ho, Google is just throwing a "hissy fit" now!
Even if they withdraw in form, they will leave much behind in case they have
to come back.

At around 10pm on the night of October 29, the villager
named An and his family were ready to go to bed. Suddenly they heard
loud noises coming from the mountain slope above them, as if something was
rolling down. They stepped out and saw a car with headlights on
tumbling down.

"I yelled that 'There's been an accident' and everybody
hurried over to the car with flashlights in our hands. There was
nobody inside the car. Then we heard a woman crying for help further
up the slope. So we climbed towards her. We saw a middle-aged
couple there. The middle-aged man was Zhushi town party secretary Chen
Yaodong, who had served previously as our town party secretary and therefore
we recognized him. He was in reasonable shape and he could still walk
on his own. But the woman was injured more severely and covered in
blood. She also did not wear any pants. When she saw us, the
first thing that she said was: "Do not shine the flashlights -- I am very
embarrassed." So I told my nephew to take off his pants and put them
on her. Then we carried the female down the slope to level ground."
Villager An said.

The rescuers asked the couple, "What are you doing on the
hill in the middle of the night?" No direct answer was offered.
The man told the villagers that "there was a driver." When the
villagers heard that, they wanted to search for the driver. The man
said, "The driver has run off." "We were very perplexed. When we
saw the car tumble down, we immediately climbed up the hill. We did
not see anyone other than Chen Yaodong and the woman."

The villagers also said that Chen claimed that he was a
businessman at first. But because Chen had worked in their town
before, they immediately recognized him. The woman is a school teacher
in Zhushi town, and is married to the town school affairs office director.

The villagers said that this road was narrow and beaten
up. Very few cars passed through as it is not the road from the town
to the county city. Most perplexing was the fact that the woman did
not wear pants. "This was too weird. Something is fishy here."

On the afternoon of December 22, this reporter decided to
interview the principal Chen Yaodong in order to verify the facts. The
reporter called up Chen Yaodong. As soon as he learned that the caller
was a reporter, he immediately released a torrent of curses: "Your mother's
cunt! You were fucked by a stinking dog! How dare a lousy
newspaper reporter hassle an important person like me! Your daddy me
is going to call up the Telecommunications Ministry about you ..."

The telephone call lasted more than 3 minutes.
During the call, the reporter identified himself as a reporter no less than
six times. But Chen Yaodong continued to curse. After one minute
or so into the conversation, the reporter recorded the ensuing conversation.
Chen Yaodong used just about every obscenity that is in the language.
It would be hard to imagine any citizen could say such things, much less
than a town party secretary.

The reporter then proceeded to the county party office to
follow up. The county party disciplinary committee director Chen
Shiguang said: "We have spoken to Chen Yaodong, and we have relieved him of
his duties as town party secretary." When told of the abusive
telephone call, Chen Shiguang promised to speak to Chen Yaodong again.
The reporter asked to see the documents about the disciplinary actions
against Chen Yaodong, but Chen Shiguang kept saying, "There is no need to
report this since it has been dealt with."

The county party publicity department Li Wenjun told the
reporter that the county disciplinary committee interviewed more than 50
villagers, most of whom did not know what happened. They also spoke to
the principals Chen Yaodong, the woman and her husband and all three denied
anything unbecoming had occurred among them. Chen Yaodong said that he
had been asked to attend a meeting in the county city the next day and
therefore he drove late in the night from the town to the county city.
Along the way, he met the female school teacher and offered her a ride.
The woman said that she asked Chen Yaodong to give her a ride to her
relative's home which was near the village where the accident occurred.
Given these statements, the county disciplinary committee could not go any
further.

However, the county disciplinary committee determined that
Chen Yaodong was ready to get a third person to admit to be driving at the
time and therefore taking the blame. As a result, the committee
decided to relieve Chen Yaodong of duties as party secretary, place a major
warning into his file, demote him to become a rank-and-file worker and make
him pay for the economic damages from the accident.

The reporter asked to see the relevant documents.
The publicity department director called the party committee office director
and then told the reporter that the documents have not been signed.
Even when signed, they cannot be shown because they have to kept on file.
Thus, the reporter never got to read the relevant documents in the case.

But Li Wenjun said that although Chen Yaodong has his
flaws, he is still a dutiful cadre with good accomplishments over the years.
The reporter was perplexed at how a cadre who heap verbal abuse on others
can be a decent cadre. If he had such a bad attitude towards a
reporter on the phone, how arrogant and overbearing might he be against an
ordinary citizen? How can people like that be kept in the ranks?

No sooner than Hong Kong University female student
Christina Chan was arrested by the police in "retaliation" than she was
threatened and sexually harassed by by a netizen who called himself a
"former senior Hong Kong Police officer" at the Hong Kong Police Discussion
Forum." This netzien made a post titled "Sexy wild kitten Christina
Chan has been arrested!..." in which he wrote: "If I were dealing with her,
it would be big trouble. There could easily be a baby ..." This
affair upset netizens who condemned him at the discussion forums.
Christina Chan said that she found this threat frightening: "The police
should be protecting the people, not just 'bullying' girls all the time."

[So far, the Hong Kong Police has taken no action with
respect to this case. The first hurdle is whether the statement
constitutes a crime. In previous cases, a netizen threatening to blow up
Disneyland was arrested and another netizen recruiting others to form a flash
gang to rape women was also arrested. But is this case the same as those
precedents?

The statement here based upon a supposition, "If I were X,
then I might do Y." If this is criminalized, so will many more similar
statements such as: "If I were legislator Raymond Wong and Chim Pui-chung
spoke to me in that manner, I would punch his teeth out"; "If I were Obama, I
would nuke China"; "If I were Nicholas Tse, I would kill Edison Chen"; etc.
Be careful, because you may get what you don't wish for.]

However, netizens have their brand of justice through the
almighty human flesh search engine (Hong Kong Golden Forum):

First, netizens looked up other posts made by the same
person. Back on March 24, 2009, this person posted an open letter to
legislator James To and Human Rights Monitor director Law Yuk-kai.

The letter was signed under the name Lee Chi-fai. Once
there is a name, it was easy to find out why he is an ex-policeman.

In HKSAR v Lee Chi-fai and Others (DCCC 275 of 2001),
the prosecution alleged that a senior police inspector and his two sergeants
fabricated allegations against the manager of a discotheque in an attempt to
cover up an assault on him by police. They were convicted after trial of
offences of doing an act intended to pervert the course of public justice
and common assault. The accused were imprisoned for terms which ranged from
1-1/2 years to 2-1/2 years.

Is this the same Lee Chi-fai, given that it is a rather
common name? Nobody cares about these details ...

On June 4, 1990, more than 100 university students
protested outside the Xinhua branch in Queen's Road East, after a
candle-light vigil in Victoria Park. Students scuffled with police stationed
outside the building when they made a failed attempt to storm a police
cordon.

On June 4, 1992, more than 100 university students staged
another protest outside the Xinhua office. Some were angry that police
stopped them from approaching the front door of Xinhua and broke through a
police cordon. Several students were arrested during the scuffle.

In June 1993, student activists Richard Tsoi Yiu-cheong
and Andrew To Kwan-hang, who organised the protest, were found guilty of
unlawful assembly and ordered three months later to undertake 160 hours of
community service. To is now vice-chairman of the League of Social
Democrats.

Tsoi says they charged the police cordon because they were
advocates of civil disobedience. "We believed there was no ground for police
to block us from demonstrating in the area outside Xinhua and it was an
opportunity to challenge the Public Order Ordinance," he recalls.

"We had a thorough discussion before the protest and what
we did was basically non-violent. Nobody was injured during the incident."

But he says the protest was organised and led by people
who could put the situation under control if necessary.

A few years later Tsoi was back in the thick of the action
as convenor of the Civil Human Rights Front which organised the 500,000
strong July 1 march in 2003 against government plans to introduce national
security legislation. He was also convenor of Power for Democracy, which
organised the January 1 march for universal suffrage.

Unlike these veteran activists, the new generation of
protesters may not be able to keep a cool head. Two policemen and a
protester were slightly injured when a small group of activists broke
through a police cordon and charged towards the liaison office at the end of
the January 1 march.

Professor Ma Ngok, a political scientist at Chinese
University, says the students who charged towards the Xinhua office in the
early 1990s were able to tell the public what they were fighting for.

"But I can't see the activists who charged toward the
liaison office on January 1 give a clear rationale for their actions. What
is worrying is those activists appeared to be unorganised and nobody would
be able to control the situation if things went wrong," Ma says.

Some local media attributed the radical actions of some
young activists to the lack of social mobility in Hong Kong and the sense of
powerlessness among the "post-80s generation". The demonstrations during the
World Trade Organisation meeting in Hong Kong in 2005, protests against the
demolition of the Star Ferry clock tower in 2006 and Queen's Pier the
following year also witnessed the rise of a few hundred new-generation
activists who pursue post-material values such as heritage preservation and
fair trade.

Tong Ying-tung - a 26-year-old activist who recently took
part in a city-wide walk in protest at the construction of the high-speed
rail link to Guangzhou - complains that Hongkongers are under-represented in
the political system.

"The government only heeds the voice of the rich and
powerful. It doesn't take public opinion seriously even when hundreds of
thousands of people took to the streets several years ago," she says.
"That's why I chose this method this time to express my views."

Lawrence Tsoi, a Form Seven student who joined Friday's
protest against the proposed express rail link, disagrees that the actions
of the activists are radical. "Young people should fight to get their voices
heard," he says.

Ma agrees that some young people, including some of his
students, have become impatient with conventional ways to express their
views. "They may think it's meaningless to disperse after a march and prefer
staying on the spot until they are removed by police," he says.

But he believes that some media may have blown the
discontent out of proportion. And perhaps overgeneralised the grievances of
a small group as the overall sentiment of twentysomethings.

All of a sudden, the post-80's have become the talk of
town in Hong Kong ... I have spent a lot of time listening to them.
Recently, they have been verbally abusing me on the Internet and therefore I
should listen to them even more carefully. I have figured out some
truths.

First of all, most of the angry young people on the
Internet are not very good at expressing themselves. Most of their
reflections are emotionally driven short phrases such as: "Eat shit!" "Game
over for you!" "Shut up!" "Score!" "Good game!" plus a lot of foul
language that is inappropriate to print here. I even learned one of
their newly fashionable phrases that have not yet entered mainstream
society: "fifty cents." Don't ask me what this means, but I think it
will become popular soon.

I call this mode of expression "animal language." I
don't imply anything derogatory here. This mode of expression is like
dog barking or cat meowing and can communicate a simple emotion in a very
direct manner. But it conveys very little rational thinking.
Instead, it is more like animal instinct. When someone is immersed in
this kind of environment where you praise me for being "cool" and I praise
you for being "awesome," it is natural to have a type of herd instinct.
Everyday, they are forming groups to support this or oppose that. By
pressing the ENTER key, they join a group concerned with a particular issue.
If an issue touches a chord somewhere, they can package it to get thousands
to sign up. If one of them says, "Go get them!" they will take action.

Of course, there are longer expressions above the level of
"animal language." Here are some samples from HK Golden Forum, the
largest home base for angry young people:

The police force the people to go into the streets
through their actions ...

The police ... infernal affairs ...

I just listened to the RTHK training class for political
newbies. I listened to Ms. Chan spoke for the first time. She
spoke very well.

Support Ms. Chan. Do not be afraid of police dogs.

There is no need need to be afraid if she is not angry.

I don't know how many times she has been arrested
before.

In the absence of existing terms, let us call this "baby
hooligan talk" for the moment. We observe certain embryonic ideas, but
the foci of the discussions are constantly shifting without any in-depth
exploration of any issues. The effect is basically the same as the
aforementioned "animal language."

Therefore, it is a hopeless task to decipher what the
angry young people want or their reasons on the basis of their own words.
Our present understanding of them comes mainly from their online discussions
of the commentaries coming from mainstream media commentators. This is
problematic in terms of methodology, because these spokespersons for the
angry young people are not just simply presenting the opinions and demands
of the angry young people, but they are injecting their own agenda and
exploiting the situation to their own advantage. The cases of the
Express Rail Link/land acquisition in Choi Yuen Village and the opposition
against the functional constituencies are illustrative.

There is never any youth problem -- there are only adult
problems. The angry youth phenomenon is only a symptom of the sickness
of Hong Kong society as a whole, in the manner of a fever being the symptom
of an underlying ailment. For now, our system has suddenly discovered
the not exactly novel post-80's generation. Soon there will be no
doubt be a whole bunch of youth policies to deal with the problem. But
just as antipyretic medicine reduces fever but does not deal with the
underlying ailment, the young problem will blow up again as long as the
underlying social problems exist.

Therefore, we must discover the deep structural reasons
for the phenomenon of angry youth people. The angry youth do not know
how to express themselves. For example, they say that Hong Kong should
go back to farming instead of developing economically. These rash
words of ignorance should not be taken seriously. One of their
frustrations is the lack of opportunity. But if we shut off the
channels to mainland China, the opportunities will be even fewer, or even
non-existent. When that time comes, there will be more frustrations
and even more demonstrations. They are only saying that if Hong Kong
continues to develop, the opportunities will always be yours. So let
us not develop anymore. We won't get any advantages but neither will
you. Nobody gets anything. An unstable society means nothing to
angry young people who don't have anything anyway, but the establishment fat
cats will be scared of even the mildest disturbance.